“I don’t particularly like the effect that it has on politics,” former Kansas Republican Gov. John Anderson said about special-interest causes such as abortion.
Anderson, who was governor from 1961 to 1964, told the Topeka Capital-Journal that too many people forget government exists to serve broad public interests. “Change should be in the interests of the general public,” he said.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- XXX on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- writerdog on It’s the stupidity about the economy
23 Comments
When the Governor stated that she was personally Pro-life but that she could not let that control her decisions on the subject. It was used against her, but really is it not what we want in a leader? Someone that does not govern by their thoughts but by the needs and for the good of all those they lead.As the saying goes, “By the people and for the people” that means all the people not just a select few, or those who have the money and clout to force their will on the rest.
Public funding of election campaigns makes sense doesn’t it? Seems to be successful in the few states that use it?
Ken: I’m not so sure that public funding improves our political system. Free money attracts politicians like bees to honey. I’m convinced that’s why some politicians run for president. There are probably ways to reduce campaign expenses such as by shortening campaigns and limiting TV advertising, etc.
Hello former governor John Anderson. Mr. Anderson came to the Kansas governor’s office from being the Kansas Attorney General. I first met Governor Anderson in 1961 while living in Topeka waiting to go to K.U. in the fall.
Years later in the 1980’s and early 1990’s, I occasionally stopped at his weekend farm out near DeSoto, Kansas, to sit on a downed tree to talk history and politics with Mr. Anderson.
His parents and I believe grandparents were pioneer settlers in Johnson County, Kansas. His career over the years was as a lawyer and I believe his son is a currently a judge.
John Anderson comes from the old school, perhaps in the pattern of Dwight Eisenhower. So, John, we need to visit again about some of those pioneer and Shawnee Indian days of early Kansas.
Yes, the government does serve the broad interests of the people, the main interest being to secure the safety of the people without regard to race, religion, age, status, etc. When a politician has so little sense that he or she thinks chopping babies in the womb is a good idea, then that person is just not fit for public office because he or she is willing to sacrifice the innocent lives of the most vulnerable of our society for political gain. Some issues simply present a line of demarcation that should not be crossed. Abortion is one of them. It goes to character and basic human morality, which should count more in politics than they currently do.
Hungry kids in Kansas “present a line of demarcation that should not be crossed.” Children who are not covered by health insurance “present a line of demarcation that should not be crossed.” In-state colleges which double their tuition in 5 years because legislators are not concerned about funding higher ed “present a line of demarcation that should not be crossed.”
No one likes abortion, but helping Kansas families survive the economic squeeze that threatens the vitality of the middle class, and diminishes the upward mobility of our children and grandchildren through higher education, is just as much of a moral imperative.
Politicians still use the one issue to sell their campaigns to the public. They just disguise it in a party affiliation package.
For Democrats it’s the package that says how corrupt, stupid and wastefully spending Republican are. Or how to ridicule anyone that has a faith based background. Of course, the Democrats will wave their faith based background like a banner of moral championship. It’s different when they do it because after all they would never use it for political gain (rolls eyes.)
The Republican Package of one issue politics is focused on security. Security of your wallet from those Tax Raising-Government money spending Democrats. Security for freedom of religion and security from the evil ACLU by protecting your legal interests. They can claim obstructive works by the Democrats because they will weaken our national defense and allow terrorists in our country by the tens of thousands because of their ‘hug an enemy’ policies. They will scare the bejeebers out of the elderly telling all that you will lose everything if Democrats are elected.
Of course, when the average voter asks “What good are you going to do?” Each party, Democrat or Republican will attack each other with accusations of how evil the other is.
When they do get elected, both parties have a tendency to forget about all those campaign promises. They are now in a position of power and need to maneuver to get on those committees and take strategic spots as Chairpersons, so they can keep power.
It is about power after all,not about doing the peoples work. Politicians that do the people work will end up looking for work themselves after one term.
It’s all about pork, forcing one’s personal philosophies using government funds – it’s all about power.
If they fail to meet their campaign objectives, they can point to the other party as being obstructionist. After all, they are just one person against the evil giants of political corruption. They tried, really they did and they need a few more years in office so they can get that wealthy status secured.
One issue? You bet – personal power.
Republicans will always always use one issue campaigns as a way to whip up their base of the Social Christian Conservatives. This is because these one issue campaigns work with sheeple who are only followers – they cannot think for themselves because they are incapable of seeing anything beyond their self-righteous pointy little up-turned noses.
So, is former Governor Anderson saying that the PEOPLE should not band together to advance their causes? I believe the US Constitution guarantees us the right to petition the government. Should this right be abridged because someone thinks that all “single issues” are inherently bad?
Groups form to support things that are important to them, whether it be gun ownership, abortion, pornography, utility bills or you name it. Each of these groups (either formal or informal) could be accused of being ’single issue’ groups, and if we are to follow Mr. Anderson’s logic, dismissed out of hand.
True, it is government’s job to “serve broad public interest”, but that is not enhanced by ignoring issues of extreme importance to the people who give their time, effort, money and dedication to.
But Christian Conservatives have been the total force behind the abortion issue. This group has totally turned me off because of their methods of advancing their agenda and I think the rest of the majority of Americans are tired of their one-tune party.
But if one party is type-casted into one issue mold – is that party really in a position to govern? I don’t think so and obviously not – the GOP lost this past election and due, in part, to the Christian Conservatives lack of bipartisanship.
Rosemary’s baby is having a meltdown. She is one of those people who believe THEY should make decisions regarding another person’s life and body. I appreciate that Sebelius understands that although abortion is unfortunate, that it’s far more deadly and unfortunate for the lives of women to restrict abortion.I won’t pretend to tell you that I know what is best for you, I’d appreciate the same consideration.
Without even getting into the argument of what is best for the life living inside of a pregnant woman, are women contemplating abortions given facts from public agencies? Or just strictly encouraged to get it done?Do you know any woman who have had abortions that are happy with the decision afterwards or not psychologically damaged?I wouldn’t tell you what is best for you or attempt to make abortion illegal in this country.But true education on the choices and ramifications of abortion would someday hopefully lead to the need for them being non-existent.
http://www.abortionfacts.com/
Character and Human morality? Nothing defines our national morality and character than “Freedom to Choose” …. I still find it amazing that any woman would allow a government dominated by men to limit their own right to choose — anything …
KIA that is an extremely biased site. I’ve read all sorts of things distributed by anti-choice groups APPEARING to be neutral, but just a few clicks into that link you gave, every single item was anti-choice.
In ms. magazine they printed the names and stories of all sorts of women who have undergone abortion. Obviously that’s not a true representation for some would never sign their names to something like that.
There is one group that distributes a ’study’ of women who had abortions, and some of the questions are misleading…like “do you experience guilt that you had an abortion” some like 98% said yes.
I don’t dispute that fact. MOST WOMEN FEEL TREMENDOUS GUILT- women don’t make the decision lightly! But the question they did not ask (or at least did not report), was ‘do you still feel it was the right decision for you’.
Another thing left out, women who give children up for adoption or keep babies feel tremendous guilt as well. I was one who considered abortion and adoption and chose to keep my babies (I’m pro-choice) The guilt I have felt through the years of not being able to provide better, the stress of always having babysitters, not being there, is ALSO overwhelming. Sometimes so much that I felt guilty for NOT having an abortion or giving them up for adoption.
An unplanned pregnancy is going to produce guilt NO MATTER WHICH WAY YOU CHOOSE.
And do providers give all the facts, yes. Do providers provide counseling, YES. Providers also will NOT perform an abortion unless the woman is totally informed and wanting it. If they’re even remotely on the fence, the abortion provider WILL NOT perform the abortion. There is NO encouragement to do so.
By the way Kia, I do agree that we so need more education, more access to birth control…but guess who fights against that?
I’ll give you a hint, it’s not the pro-choice side.
This past year we attempted to get legislation for “abstinence plus”, for schools to encourage abstinence while also giving the information on how to protect themselves and the consequences of having sex. It was rejected by the anti-choice crowd who were in power.
Abstinence only education (till marriage, not just adulthood) -these are the people coming to your schools to give information to your children now… they even acknowledge that it is not going to work for most teens. And not surprisingly, the abortion rates and teen pregnancy rates are ON THE RISE.
Sometimes so much that I felt guilty for NOT having an abortion or giving them up for adoption.Posted by: political_mom | November 25, 2006 at 12:49 PM
Yes Mom but from what I know of you you are very thoughtful and a great mother. I’m sure your children are very happy with your decision!Choice? Sure. But Choose life. Yes that may not always be easy but I can’t imagine truly ever regretting it.The alternative isn’t good for anyone.
Peemom,Can you honestly tell your children (to their face) that you would rather have aborted them than give birth to them?
If you can’t, then you’re not really “pro-choice” after all.
It is easy who to see who the anti-choice are in this blog. They are the people who see everything in absolutes:
“Can you honestly tell your children (to their face) that you would rather have aborted them than give birth to them?”
Being Pro-Choice has NOTHING to do with this garbage. Being Pro-Choice is about respecting a woman’s right to make reproductive decisions that include only their medical practitioner and themselves.
Will actually my daughter is now almost adult and old enough to have this discussion, and we HAVE discussed many of these things.
We’ve discussed why waiting to have sex is important and the consequences (not only pregnancy)The struggles some people have to face. I asked her if I got pregnant again, how she’d feel about having ANOTHER child with a disability in the home besides her brother. The stress on her of being the sibling of a child with disabilities has been enormous too.
Or how she’d be able to handle having a child like her brother if SHE herself got pregnant-afterall, she carries the gene too.
It’s not just about the woman you know, it’s about the family dynamic. Did you see that America’s Funniest Home videos where the parents told the kids they were going to have a 6th child? The 5 and 4 year olds were screaming and crying.
Ps, my daughter, she’s also pro-choice.
I went from being anti choice to pro-choice early on because I had a baby brother born with a horrible rare genetic defect. And I always said that if my child would be born like that I’d never allow that child so suffer like that. And I did go through genetic testing with my daughter and the chances of having a child with the same problem were determined to be the same as the rest of the population, so almost none.
By the way Kia, thanks for the nice words. I really apprecaite that.
Actually, Mr Kia, you as a man should have no say in the abortion issue if you are not the father of the child in question.
Don’t you think?
Mr KIA,Actually, nearly all of the women I’ve talked to who had abortions don’t feel especially guilt-ridden. That includes a friend I talked with when she was in her 90’s, who had an abortion in 1930 so she could keep her job, which was supporting her family in the depths of the depression, and my daughter, who couldn’t bear to bring the spawn of her rapist into the world.Most, if not all women who seek an abortion have thought through all the alternatives and made their decision based on the circumstances of their lives. They are not stupid, as you seem to believe. Unless you are prepared to change those circumstances, you have no say in her decision. And you have no right to guilt-trip her for making it.
Governor John Anderson is not the right person to comment on today’s political scene. He was fortunate to have governed in a much different time. Taxes were low, schools were funded and controlled at the local level and the thought of legalized abortion was as alien as the thought of walking on the moon. Fred Phelps was a struggling young lawyer back in Mississippi. Nobody felt the need to take your guns away or carry them concealed. Legalized gambling and its corrupting influence was locked away in a little desert oasis called Las Vegas and the death penalty was administered in a warehouse in the back of Lansing prison. The only question you had to give the right answer on was “are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party”? In short the start of the culture war that we know today was still a good twenty five years away.Pro life voters who are often derided by John Anderson and others as being single issue are anything but. However, if you are wrong on the important issues of the day, it does not matter if you are right on everything else, we cannot support you. Being a pro life voter is no picnic. Often times, we have no one to vote for. Unlike the “traditional republican majority” folks when faced with this problem though, we never vote for the other party.